Solidworks Fast Keys
Kay Hamling
Which is better? (Pro/E) Creo vs SolidWorks? That debate has raged for years, for good reason, and here is more fuel for the fire. Here is a high-level look at some fundamental differences. This is from someone who has been around both systems for many years, and is considered a complex geometry expert. I don't want to create contention, and I use both systems regularly (depending on the customer needs). See our past Tips of the Month.
These latest observations are based on, Creo 5.0 (formerly Pro/Engineer) compared with SolidWorks 17. While these versions are older now, the differences with Creo vs SolidWorks still apply pretty universally.
Yes, both Creo and SolidWorks have numerous shortcuts to help the design processes go faster. Both use the keyboard, and both use the mouse for quick access to commands. However, there are some big differences.
To sum it up, SolidWorks tends to rely more on the mouse with context sensitive and motion sensitive menus. In terms of consistency, I think SolidWorks does this better. Creo also has a lot of mouse work, but also enhances mapkeys (via keystrokes and the mouse). To me, that is just 2 ways to skin a cat - but the big differences show up in the limitations. Here are a few.
This simple example has 3 actions in one shortcut: 1) Turn Off the Display of Planes, 2) Rotate the View Position, 3) Change the Model Display state. It is very simple, I agree, but it illustrates a capability of Creo that SolidWorks can't do. Multiple sequential commands in one shortcut - which is very useful when repeating things frequently.
When comparing Creo vs SolidWorks, SolidWorks has significant limits to the number of shortcuts you can create. Creo allows one or many keystrokes to define a short-cut. SolidWorks limit is one. That means the SW limit is the number of keys on your keyboard + those using prefixes (like the Ctrl or Alt keys). I find this very limiting.
For example: 'R' may be used to sketch a rectangle - but what about differentiating between a corner/corner rectangle and a center point rectangle? Then, you can't use 'R' for showing a right side view.
How about 'A' for sketching an Arc. Center Arc? 3 Point Arc? Tangent Arc? If you have to use the mouse anyway to get to what you want, shortcuts become quite limiting. For example, not allowing multiple keystrokes like 'AC', 'A3', or 'AT'.
In SW you can also put shortcuts in a 3rd mouse button gestures, which are cool, but again, with limits. And there are 3rd mouse button menus which help, but are contrary in many respects to speed. Read Efficiency and the Mouse. True for both Creo and SolidWorks.
I would be remiss if I did not point out Creo limits as well. Compared to Pro/Engineer, the predecessor, Creo mapkeys are more limited. PTC, the makers of Creo, have made mapkeys so convoluted that it is now difficult or impossible to do things like "Select By Menu" in a mapkey. PTC has transitioned to greater limits in their own product. Why? Only the gods of Creo can make sense of taking away powerful functionality.
I give props to both for attempting ways for customers to speed up, but in the question of Creo vs SolidWorks, there is no doubt - you can't configure SW to be anywhere near as efficient or as fast as Creo.
It is worth pointing out that all is not as good for Creo as it was with Pro/E. The older versions are much faster. It appears that PTC has lost the view of what was good about their software and shot themselves in the foot through sloppy programming and laziness. For examples, try this article about Creo Workflow that slows you down.
Feature failures happen. When manipulating models, References change or conditions become invalid. That happens with all parametric modelers. How they handle it, however, differs greatly. For the most part, Pro/E stops and you have to solve the issue (or suppress it). (Not true in more recent versions of Creo, like Creo 9.)
SolidWorks is similar, but handles failures more gracefully - not using, but not really suppressing failing features (or those that rely on the failing feature). This added state gives you the opportunity to continue, showing cascading effects of the failure. If you know why something is failing, and you know it will fix itself when you make the next modification, then you just don't worry about it. Most important, the customer has the choice of dealing with it now or later. It is more graceful, for sure.
While SolidWorks does handle failures easier, it is a good thing because SolidWorks references are not as stable, and you end up with more failures for lots of silly reasons. Read more below. Also read about problems with constraining in SolidWorks. This causes failures too, so good thing the core handles it well.
If you do much with design iteration or product development, you probably deal with change requests that cause grief with your CAD models. The ability of a CAD system to handle changes gracefully is super important. Unfortunately, here again, there are big differences in Creo vs SolidWorks.
To illustrate, sometimes in SolidWorks you must manually fix related features one at a time. On one occasion I spent nearly 4 hours fixing more than 200 failed features - mostly I only had to Edit them, then Close, so SolidWorks would realize it already knew what to do. Manually for each feature! There is no reason for this. SolidWorks MAJOR Fail!
How are references made in Creo vs SolidWorks? Pro/E (Creo) has a much more stable approach to referencing. Even if you insert something between a reference and the referencing feature, it maintains the reference. SolidWorks can be a bear in dealing with this.
Another interesting problem occurs when an earlier feature appears to reference a later feature in SolidWorks. For instance, if a sketch is early in the model, then later it is used for a feature, the later feature absorbs the early sketch even though features between reference it. Makes it very difficult to diagnose issues with a model - or to even know how to modify a model - if you don't know where the information is.
Pro/E has been criticized for not being as flexible in this area. However, I'd much rather have a more rigid paradigm than spaghetti. As a designer in both systems, I can't over emphasize the importance of this when comparing Creo vs SolidWorks.
There is also the question of referencing edges or surfaces - but much has already been said about that in other places. Creo allows both, SolidWorks sticks with edges - Or, if you want more stable models, unhide a sketch and reference that (if you can figure out how to tell SW to reference the sketch instead of a point or edge). Setting best practice and stable references is much easier in Creo.
Side Note. I really hate that SolidWorks makes it so hard to drill in and grab a more stable reference deeper in a model. It will select only what it wants, and you must fiddle with "Select Other" and various filters to get what you want. Time consuming and obnoxious so most people (IMHO) defer to the easy, less stable approach. Creo, on the other hand, makes it so easy.
2nd Side Note. Using Sketches in SolidWorks for references in later features is a fantastic tool. I will frequently create defining sketches or add bits of information into sketches specifically to use them in later features. Again, in comparing Creo vs SolidWorks, only SW provides this functionality. (Note: You can sort of do this in newer Creo, but you must make the sketches independent of the features, which is a pain, especially if it already exists in the feature.)
The reason to purchase a parametric 3D CAD system is to make 3D CAD models. Right? So what about the Core Modeling Capability of Creo vs SolidWorks? This is a mixed bag because both systems have enviable capabilities. Here are a few of my favorites:
The above is just scratching the surface (pun) for these CAD systems. Pro/E started as a high-end system and maintains the advantage when things get more involved. For simple rectangles and circles, SW is arguably easier, but move beyond the basics, and the tools in Creo start to shine. For more, see the Review of SolidWorks.
I think the real key in selecting Creo vs SolidWorks - How limited do you want to be? There might be more to learn with Creo, but there are far more limits to achievement with SW. I'm not saying Creo can do anything, but certainly more. So, pick SW for a lower ceiling. Creo is certainly harder to learn.
This result is a terrible paradigm. You want to use the software, so you start with SolidWorks because it is easier to learn, but then you are limited because it is not as fast or as capable for experienced users. A tough difference comparing Creo vs SolidWorks.
The field of User Interface is huge, and it makes a big difference in how efficient you interact with software. In both cases of Creo vs SolidWorks there is a whole lot going on with the UI. There has to be. But, there are some big differences in methodology for each. Unfortunately, neither UI is stellar in my opinion.
Creo, on the other hand, is a disaster. They have too many different paradigms, and it is exceptionally modal. Modal? Yes, if you are doing something simple like measuring for example, you must first, very deliberately close the measuring tool before you can do anything else. If you click on a menu, it does nothing because you are stuck in the previous mode. Usually no warning or indication of why it won't work. You have to figure out what mode won't let go. That is just one silly example, and there are a ton. Worse, some modes have an explicit exit, and others have certain mouse click sequences.
The Creo UI inconsistency is just aggravating. I have been hard-core in Creo 9 for a year and a half, and still get caught in the modal trap, often. Creo's UI is eventually functional, but generally a huge fail. And Learning Creo is NOT easy.
Creo has a ton more to offer in terms of total package and capability, but PTC packages their stuff in too many modules all to purchase separately. Initially Creo vs SolidWorks look similar in price, but if you want full function, Creo is definitely more expensive. Also, PTC inserts some nifty gems in extra modules so you have to buy more to get the bits of cool functionality.
c80f0f1006